Author 






Title 




Imprint. 



lfi — 47372-2 SFO 



PRIVILEGE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE-PRIVILEGE OF THE PEOPLE, 



SPEECH OF MR. GIDDINGS, 

OF OHIO, 

On the Trial of Preston S. Brooks, for an Assault 
on Senator Sumner. 



BEFORE THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JULY 11, 1856. 



Mr. Speaker : I feel oppressed with the re- 
sponsibility under which we are acting. Con- 
stituting this high judicatory of the nation, we 
We sitting in judgment, upon a fellow-member. 
The eyes of the people are upon us. and the 
attention of civilized nations is directed toward 
us. We are about to discharge the highest, 
the most solemn duty, to our Government, to 
the cause of Freedom and of Human Progress, 
which will probably ever devolve upon us. On 
every hand, we are admonished to divest our- 
selves of every feeling of partisan attachment; 
and, bringing with us all the intelligence, pru- 
dence, patriotism, and justice, we can command, 
we should approach tne question in the light 
of that wi-dom which shall guide us to a just 
and proper conclusion. 

The accused is a member of our body. Our 
sympathies for him, at this most, trying period, 
cannot and ought not to be withheld. Gentle- 
men have spoken of personal feelings. If I 
were conscious of harboring unkind feelings 
toward any human being, 1 should myself feel 
most unhappy. That man is morally disqual- 
ified to discharge the duties of a statesman, who 
can look upon any person in distress with other 
emotions than those which elevate and ennoble 
our common nature. 

I speak with more than ordinary feelings. 
Fifteen years since, I was myself arraigned 
before my peers of this H>use. I then stood 
where the accused now stands, but under a dif- 
ferent charge, and under different chcumstaa- 
ces. I was denied the freedom of speech — not 
permitted to deiend myself — nor was any iii md 
permitted to utter a word in my behalf. I was 
Condemned and driven from my seat under an 
inexorable tyranny, which, thank God, is un- 
known at the present time. I tender to the 
accused the kindest sympathies of my heart. 
Sooner should my own right arm be torn from 
its socket, than I would see him treated as I 
was dealt with. I would d al out to him the 
same measure of justice that I would to a son 
or brother. , Indeed, he is my brother ; for I 
recognise God as our common father, and man- 



kind as my brethren. His happiness is as dear 
to my heart as that of any other individual out- 
side the circle of personal friends. 

While these are my feelings toward the ac- 
cused, I recognise, also, the stern obligations 
which I owe to the Constitution of my country, 
to the People of these States, to Christianity, 
and to Civilization. 

Representing thirty-one sovereign States — 
convened, under our Federal Constitution, for 
the performance of legislative duties — we look 
to that instrument, which delegates to us our 
only powers, for our rule of action. That 
charter of our Liberties provides, that "the Sen- 
ate shall bv composed cf two members from 
each State." In the labors of that body, each 
of the several States — the people of all the 
States — have an interest. And to secure this 
service to the States, and to the people of the 
whole Republic, they proceeded to ordain, fur- 
ther, that, during the session of Congress, and 
in going to and reluming from the same, such 
Senators shall be privileged from arrest, except 
for treason, felony, or breach of the peace; 
and J or any speech or debate in that body, shall 
not be questioned in any other plaee. I repeat, 
that this was intended to secure to the nation 
(he services of each and every Senator, by ex- 
tending to the individuals elected this immu- 
nity from arrest — this personal security. 

This same charter, under which we are now 
acting, provides that each House may punish 
is members for disorderly behaviour, and by a 
vote of two thirds may expel a member ; and 
that the freedom of speech shall never be 
abridged. 

Uader this ''Constitution," Massachusetts, in 
her sovereign capacity, some five years since, 
elected a Senator, and charged him with the 
maintainauce of her interests, the support of 
her dignity, and the protection of her rights. 
He took his seat in that body with these special 
duties resting upon him ; but under equal obli- 
gations to exert his best efforts for the honor 
of our Government, f >r the wt-lfire of al! the 
people of |his growing Empire, for the eleva,-: 



E^^ 
, ^ 



c 

3 



A-£ 



I 



1 



tion of mankind to a higher intelligence, civil- 
ization, and refinement, than that which we 
now enjoy. His duties had been performed to 
the acceptance of his State, and to the satisfac- 
tion of the nation generally. 

At the commencement of the present session 
of Congress, a matter of intense interest touch- 
ing the civil war which now rages in Kansas, oc- 
cupied the public mind, and continued to re- 
ceive the attention of the Senate during most 
of its sittings for the last seven months. In 
relation to this subject the Senator irom Mas- 
sachusetts, acting in accordance with his^udg-" 
ment, and the popular feeling of his State, was 
known to stand on the side of Liberty. A Sen- 
ator from South Carolina, acting upon the dic- 
tates of his own feelings and those of his State, 
was known to have espoused the cause of Sla- 
very. 

I have taken some pains to ascertain facts 
as far as I could, and am assured, by one com- 
petent to make the examination, that the Sena- 
tor from South Carolina spoke on this subject 
thirty-six times during the present session. 
This includes his regular and irregular speeches, 
interruptions, and audible assertions. In each 
and in every instance, I am told, he threw out 
ideas intended to operate against Freedom in 
Kansas. 

On the 19th and 20th May, the Senator from 
Massachusetts spoke upon the same subject. 
As he was bound by that respect which he 
owed to his State, to the people of the several 
States, and to his own reputation, he came to 
the contest prepared — his thoughts arranged, 
and his argument elaborated. I am not about 
to speak of the merits of his effort — on that 
point his address speaks for itself — but I intend 
to say that, so far as he alludes to South Caro- 
lina, or the Senator from that State, it is mere- 
ly an answer, full and ample to be sure, yet, 
nevertheless, in answer to the thirty-six speeches 
of the Senator from South Carolina. I refer to 
these facts, at this time, for the reason that 
gentlemen have attempted to justify the ac- 
cused by reason of the severity of language 
used by the Senator from Massachusetts. But I 
think that every word uttered by the Senator 
from Massachusetts, in reference to the Sena- 
tor from South Carolina, or hi3 State, was call- 
ed for, and strictly in response to the remarks 
of that Senator. Another important fact which 
I would call attention to is, that, during the de- 
livery of that speech, a Senator from South 
Carolina was present, and listened to it in pro- 
found silence, not even intimating that a word, 
sentence, or paragraph, transcended the rules 
of the body, the parliamentary law, or the proper 
amenities of debate. It was the imperative 
duty of the presiding officer of that body to call 
him to order, if in any respect he violated the 
rules of debate. Indeed, it was the duty of 
every member of that body to preserve its dig- 
nity, and the proper decorum which is enjoin- 
ed on every member by the parliamentary law. 
But, sir, neither the presiding officer, nor the 
Senator from South Carolina who was present, 



nor any member of that body, dreamed that the 
Senator from Massachusetts uttered a sentence 
or paragraph not strictly authorized by the 
rules of that body. Nor was the Senator from ' 
Massachusetts supposed to transcend the rules 
of debate, through the forbearance or inatten- 
tion of gentlemen opposed to him in politics. I 
listened to the whole of that speech. I sat near 
the Senator who delivered it, nor was I an un- 
interested spectator. And to show that he was 
watched with a close scrutiny, I will relate an 
incident. In one part of the hall, gentlemen 
conversed so loudly as to disturb the Senator 
who was speaking. He stopped, and, turning to 
the Sergeant at-arms, mildly requested him to 
preserve order. But scarcely had the words 
escaped his lips, before a slaveholding member 
called him to order for asking the Sergeant-at- 
arms, instead of the presiding officer, to keep 
order. The President of the Senate decided 
him out of order, and the Senator apologized, 
saying he " supposed the President had not no- 
ticed the disorder." The President assured him 
he had not, and the Senator proceeded with 
his remarks. Why, sir, three-fourths of trie 
Senate were opposed, politically, to the Senator 
from Massachusetts. They had the power to 
compel him to observe order, at any moment, 
and to silence him if he erred in this respect, 
and it was their duty to do it. To assert that 
they permitted him to utter language not au- 
thorized by the rules of the Senate, is to stulti- 
fy every member of that body. 

It was under these circumstances that the ac- 
cused, a member of this House, imagined that 
his State and her absent Senator had been im- 
properly and unjustifiably assailed by the Sen- 
ator from Massachusetts ; and, by a code of 
morals unknown to the more enlightened civil- 
ization of the free States, he sat in judgment 
upon the case, and determined the Senator's 
guilt. He pronounced the parliamentary law, 
the rules of the Senate, the laws of the land, 
and that higher tribunal of our country — public 
opinion — defective and impotent in the admin- 
istration of justice; and, assuming the right to 
avenge his supposed wrongs, he entered that 
inner sanctuary of the people, and, while the 
Senator was engaged at his table, struck him 
down with a bludgeon, and in a barbarous 
manner continued to beat his prostrate and 
apparently lifeless form, until gentlemen came 
from distant parts of the hall, and forcibly took 
him from his victim. Of these facts there is 
neither denial nor doubt. The record of the 
testimony and avowals of the accused have 
placed them beyond coucroversy, and it is no 
purpose of mine to aggravate or extenuate 
them. 

The natural result has followed the commis- 
sion of this offence. The State of Massachu- 
setts has been thus far deprived of the services 
of her Senator. The people of our nation have 
lost the benefit of his labors. The cause of 
Human Progress, of Civilization, ot Christian- 
ity, have lost the efforts of an able advocate. 

We are not trying a case of assault and bat- 



J 



tery, as some gentlemen have represented. The 
crime which we are investigating was commit- 
ted against the most vital principles of the Con- 
stitution, against the Government itself, against 
the sovereignty of Massachusetts, against the 
people of the United States, against Christianity 
and Civilisation. For these great, crimes, the 
accused is now arraigned before the Represent- 
atives of the people. 

There are considerations which cannot be 
separated from this case. The Senator from 
Massachusetts was not the mere representative 
of a State, or party, or section. He labored for 
the elevation of our Government and of man- 
kind. His efforts were not limited to the Ea3t 
or the West, to the North or the South. In him 
and in his labors, the slaveholder, the abolition- 
ist, and the slave, were equally interested ; and 
the blow which struck him to the earth, throbbed 
in the temples of twenty-five millions of people. 
He had travelled extensively in Europe, had 
made the acquaintance of her leading states- 
men and philanthropists. In Great Britain and 
on the continent, he was known as an able and 
devoted friend of humanity ; and when they 
learned that he had entered the Senate, they 
were strengthened in their belief that this grand 
experiment, which is now testing the ability of 
man to govern himself, would succeed. But 
when they read of this outrage, they felt the 
wound which had been inflicted upon the cause 
of truth, justice, and free institutions. Sir, the 
great and the good in other lands deeply sym- 
pathize with the friends of Freedom in our own 
country. Their confidence in the success of 
that high and pure philanthropy, of which the 
Senator from Massachusetts was a devoted ad- 
vocate, was impaired by this assault upon him. 
Wherever Christianity has friends, good men 
will lament, bitterly lament, this sad outrage. 

Borne down by the weight of these conside- 
rations, we turn to the particular friends of the 
accused ; we call on them for some excuse, 
or justifiation, or mitigating circumstance, at- 
tending this violent assault upon our free insti- 
tutions. They reply, that this is an ordinary 
case of assault, and battery, punishable only by 
municipal laws. After the very clear distinc- 
tion shown by my colleague [Mr. Bingham] 
between the assault and battery which was an 
offence against the peace of the community, 
punishable in municipal courts, under municipal 
law, and this great crime against the Constitu- 
tion, against the sovereignty of Massachusetts, 
and against the people of all the States, cogni- 
zable only in this high judicatory, this argu- 
ment on behalf of the accused does injustice 
to the moral and legal acumen of those who 
make it. The municipal court had no juris- 
diction of this outrage upon the Constitution, 
nor have we jurisdiction of the offence against, 
the municipal laws. We cannot fine the accu- 
sed, nor could that court expel him from this 
body. But I will not argue this objection fur- 
ther, as it has been already fully answered by 
other gentlemen. 

Gentlemen plead to the jurisdiction of this 



body. They first deny that the -authority of 
the Constitution to punish for disorderly con- 
duct, and, by a vote of two-thirds, to expel a 
member, extends to offences committed outside 
these walls. The long array of cases cited by 
my eloquent colleague, [Mr. Bingham,] and by 
the able chairman of the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs, [Mr. Pennington,] and by the astute 
gentleman who presides over the Committee on 
the Judiciary, [Mr. Simmons,] would seem to 
have placed this point beyond controversy. 
But, without referring to those authorities or 
precedents, I have no hesitation in saying that 
every court of justice and every legislative body 
is clothed with the inherent right, with the 
moral duty, and that the political necessity 
rests upon it, to protect itself. Without the 
exercise of this right and power, no legislative 
body can exist. 

Gentlemen next meet us with the argument 
that this body cannot punish its members for 
contempt, or for offences, or disorderly con- 
duct, unless we shall have defined the crime, 
and prescribed the penalty by existing rules or 
statute. 

This point has been often urged, perhaps I 
may say it has been brought forward in almost 
every case since the time of Jefferson, but never 
successfully. It has also been fully met by 
the gentlemen referred to. They have placed 
it in such a clear and distinct light, that it 
would appear very little remains to be said 
upon it. I would, however, add, that we are 
here as the Representatives of the people, for 
the purpose of legislating, clothed with the ne- 
cessary powers to discharge that duty. We 
are at all times equally supreme. We may 
make a law to-day, and repeal it to-morrow. 
We may establish rules to-day, and repudiate 
them at our next sitting. Our only law is that 
great fundamental law, the Constitution ; and 
the only court in which our errors can be re- 
viewed or corrected, is the enlightened tribuaal 
of popular opiniou, where retributive justice is 
dealt out to us, and to those whom we judge. 
We should bear in mind that we are not sitting 
as a nisi prius court, holding our sessions un- 
der and by virtue of statute laws, and acting 
in conformity to the dictates and decisions of 
some more dignified tribunal. 

Yet this argument against the exercise of 
any and of all discretion by this body, is ur? ed 
with great ability by gentlemen from the South- 
ern section of our Union. Gentlemen from the 
slaveholding States are distinguished usually 
for what they term a " strict construction of 
the Constitution ; " and, on the present occa- 
sion, this doctrine has been urged, and its ap- 
plication insisted on, by every gentleman from 
our slaveholding States. I have'reason to know 
that they have not at all times been tenacious of 
either the doctrine, cr its application. States- 
men should have memories ! 

Fifteen years since, I witnessed a different 
scene in this Hall. The Hon. John Quincy 
Adams, at that time a Representative from 
Massachusetts, was placed on trial. The diffi- 



culty at that time, as well as on the presen* 
occasion, originated in the conflict, betweei 
Freedom and Slavery. Some of the peoph 
of Massachusetts, feeling burdened with the 
expenses which the support of that institution 
had brought upon our Government, sent to this 
body a respectful petition, praying Congress to 
take measures for a peaceful dissolution of tin 
Union. Thi^i petition was transmitted to Mr. 
Adams for presentation. In the true spirit of 
our institutions, he felt that the people, consti- 
tuting; the sovereign power of the nation, were 
to be treated respectfully, and iheir petitions 
answered in candor. He moved the reference 
of the petition to a select committee, with in- 
structions to report to the Home, and through 
this body to the petitioners and the country, 
the reasons why such petition could not bt 
granted. 

But, sir, he had not given full utterance to 
these words, before at least a score of Southern 
members were upon their feet, each demanding 
an opportunity to speak. In a iew moments, a 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Gilmer] pre 
sented a resolution, declaring "that the mem- 
ber from Massachusetts, by presenting to this 
House a peril ion for a dissolution of the 
Union, had justly incurred the severe censure 
of this body." Mark the fact, that this resolu- 
tion came from Virginia, that land of abstrac- 
tions and of strict construction. It was brought 
forward by one of her most cherished sons. It 
was aimed at the distinguished member from 
Massachusetts. No Southern man appeared 
to doubt, and surely none denied, the jurisdic- 
tion, or the power of the House to censure Mr. 
Adams for this discharge of his constitutional 
duty. 

That night, a caucus of Southern members 
was held to, concert measures by which to insure 
the adoption of the resolution. Of course, I 
now speak from the information derived from 
tho e who attended, and from contemporaneous 
history, for I was not with them, either in body 
or in spirit. At that consultation, the burden 
of supporting the Constitution was transferred 
from Mr. Gilmer, who was a Democrat, to Mr. 
Marshall, of Kentucky, who was a Whig; both 
of whom were Southern men ; yet I never 
learned, nor did I hear it intimated, that, any 
member in that caucus of Southern men doubt- 
ed the full power of this body to punish Mr. 
Adams for performing his duty. The friends 
of Mr. Adams often inquired wherein that, gen- 
tleman had offended. Why, sir, he had offended 
the Slave Power ; and the representatives of the 
of the Slave Interest felt that they had an ex- 
cuse, a fact on which they could found an effort 
to strike down his influence, to destroy his fair 
fame, to deprive Freedom of its sternest advo- 
cate. They sought for no rules or law defining 
the offence, or declaring the penalty attached 
to it ; but they assailed him in every way which 
hatred could invent, or malice express. He was 
charged with treason to our Government, with 
moral perjury, and with almost every crime 
tound iu the catalogue of offences. There he 



sat, in the seat now occupied by his successor — ' 
a man venerable for his age. for his great learn- 
irg, for his cxabed patriotism; venerable for 
his services to his coun'ry ; around his brow 
clustered all the honors which a faithful, upright, 
and wise administration of the highest office 
known to mortals couM confer. Yft, sir, for t 
hireen days he was subjected to these assaubs, 
During that, tine, the waves of tdaveholding in- 
vective, detraction, and calumny, rolled and 
dashed around bim.in wild confusion, until the 
raging elements had spent their force; while, 
from the first introduction of the resolution to 
its final disposiion, not one word was uttered 
by a Southern Democrat, indicating the want 
>f full and constitutional powers to act, on 'he 
-subject, without any rvle or law prescribing the 
penalty. Then, sir, Massachusetts was on trial, 
and slaveholders were the prosecutors. Now, 
sir, a son of South Carolina is on trial for a 
wrong — a crime perpetrated against the sove- 
reign right of Massachusetts. This change of 
position, by slaveholders, is very remarkable. 
There are yet lingering in this Hall two or three 
Southern members who then voted in faror of 
ceusuring Mr. Adams. I am curious to see 
how they will vote on the present occasion. I 
wish rhey were present at this time. 1 desire 
to address some thoughts to their considera- 
tion, particularly. 

I ask this H^use and the historian to notice 
the different spirit in which this trial i3 prose- 
cuted, from that manifested on the trial of Mr. 
Adams. Siuce the attention .of the Hous p vvas 
first called to the resolution before us. to this 
hour, we have not heard an unkind word uttered 
against the accused. Every speaker has man- 
ifested a sympathy in his behalf. We regard 
htm as unfortunate in his education, his preju- 
dices, and views of society and of human gov- 
ernment; and I do not hesitate to say, that not 
a member from the free States feels the least 
impulse of ill-will toward him, or of personal 
revenge. We are borne along to our conclu- 
si ms by the irresistible force of public duty. 
Tais is but the reflection of that popular senti- 
ment which prevails in the free States. It is 
founded upon the great doctrine so ably advo- 
cated by the Senator whose injury we deplore — 
that doctrine which teaches us the fatherhood 
of God and the brotherhood of man — that doc- 
trine which purifies the human heart from its 
viler passions of revenge, hatred, and malice, 
aud leads us to do unto others as we would 
have them do unto us. So different are these 
manifestations from those which characterized 
ihe trial of Mr. Adams, that I comroeni the 
marked distinction to the House and the coun* 
try. 

Another case, which illustrates this change 
in the position of Southern gentlemen, ought 
not to pass unnoticed, although I feel embar- 
rassed in calling it to the attention of the House, 
inasmuch as I was myself the victim. It is 
not, however, entirely unknown to gentlemen, 
that while my venerable and ever-lamented 
friend, Mr. Adame, was laboring to regain the 



& 



r*«ht of petition, T wa3 myself toiling, in a more 
},,i ; \ ■ i • re, to regain ; he freedom of speech, 
which had been stricken down in this Ball. 

For ] eara I had sat in this body, hearing my- 1 
self and my people* and ail lovers of Liberty, 
contemned, vilified, and Blandered, fur enter- 
taining the vi^-ws which Jefferson and Wash- 
ington find Franklin and Hancock, and the 
whole Continental Congress^ had proclaimed as 
the foundation of our Republic; yet our lip- 
were hermetically sealed by " gag rules," a^ 
they were then called. Tbe'Slave Power ruled 
supreme in Congress; and no word was allowed 
to 'be spoken derogatory to that institution. 

At- that, time, a slave-ship, from Richmond, 
was taken possession of bv her cargo ot human 
beings, guided to Nassau, where they lande< 
on 1! resuming their Ood-given rights. 

The President directt d Our Minister at Lo 
to demand compensation for the bones 
muscles, the blood and sinews, of these people. 
The Senate freely discussed the subject, and 
threatened war — bloody and exterminating 
war — unless Eogland should hand over a foil 
compensation tothose traffickers in human flesh. 
But here, sir, in this body, we could say notb 
ing. We were constrained to look on in silence ! 
The constitutional guaranty that "the freedom 
of speech should never be abridged," was then 
repudiated and scorned. I had sworn to sup- 
port the Constitution, but my voice was hushed 
by those rules, which are now remembered as 
a disgrace to this body. I was shocked at the 
indications rf a war, with a powerful nation, to 
to sustain a coastwise commerce in human 
beings. 

In order to enter my protest against such a 
disgrace to onr nation, and the a?e in which 
we live, I drew up a series of resolutions, to the 
effect that Congress possessed no rightful an- 
thoritv under the Constitution to -involve the 
people of the free States in a war, and compel 
our Northern freemen to die on the battle-field, 
for the support of that infamous traffic. These 
resolutions were regularly presented for the 
consideration of this body. But scarcely had 
they been read at the Clerk's table, when a 
slaveholder rose and introduced a resolution ol 
censure against me, for thus discharging a duty 
which I owed to my people and to the Consti 
tution. He, too, was from Virginia — from that 
State which, in such strong and eloquent, Ian 



my friends, and, without permitting me or any 
friend of free speech to sav a woid in my de- 
fence, the resolution was adopted by a vote of 
one hundred and twenty -three to sixty vine. I 
was condemned, unheard, and driven from my 
seat. Sir, I spurned the tyranny, and appealed 
to the people. They hurled contempt, at the 
efforts of the Slave Power to strike down the 
freedom of speech, to extinguish ihe lamp of 
Liberty which was then flickering in its socket, 
casting but a dim light up^n the legislation of 
Congress. They ordered me back to my post, 
and directed me to maintain the freedom of 

debate; AND AS Till; LORD LIVETHj AXI> AS MY 
son, LIYKTU, 1 WILL NEVEB BUBBEMBEB IT. 

But, sir, gentlemen from Virginia, nor from 
other slave States, hesitated to seal my lips and 
condemn me, unheard. Although no rule nor 
law had declared the presentation of resolu- 
tions penal, in the whole of the slave States 
but two gentlemen voted against the resolution ; 
these were Governor Pope and Hon. J. R. 
Underwood, of Kentucky. 1 mention their 
names with great pleasure, for they manifested 
an honest independence which commends them 
to my favorable recollection. I refer to these 
cases to show that Southern members then held 
a totally different doctrine from that which they 
now urge with such earnestness. Can they 
suppose this body will now change its rule of 
action, and face to the right about, to suit the 
latitude of the accused ? I trust not. I shall 
not, therefore, hesitate to follow the practice 
adopted by the Senate, and by this body, from 
the adoption of the Constitution. Indeed, the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Simmons] has 
shown it to have been adopted under the old 
Confederation, as early as 1786. 

Having disposed of that point, I proceed to 
notice an intimation thrown out, as I suppose, 
to cast an imputation upon the Senator from 
Massachusetts aud his friends, rather than as a 
defence of the accused. The intimation has 
been iterated and reiterated by partisan presses, 
and has been repeated in this debate, that the 
Senator was not seriously injured by the beat- 
ing which constitutes the crime for which the 
accused is now on trial; that he might have 
long since resumed his seat in the Senate, but 
has been deterred by a desire to represent his 
injury as more aggravated than it really is. 

I deeply regret this mean attempt to add in- 



guage, has this day declared that we have no 

authority to punish or censure a member for any suit to injury ! I wish I had been spared the 

act which is not declared penal by some pre- duty of referring to facts which I feel constram- 



scribed rule or lata. True, sir, as Ohio was then 
being called, the member from Virginia could 
not bring his resolution regularly before the 
House; and when the Speaker had thus declared 
the author passed it over to a douglifaced col- 
leaaue of mine, who presented it, aud demand- 
ed ;he previous question. 

Gentlemen from the slave States did not wait 
to inquire for the prescribed ride or statute de- 
claring the penalty attached to the crime of 
oresenting resolutions. So far from that, they 
roted z.x, once to seal my own lips and those of 



ed to state. I visited that worthy Senator on 
Tuesday, after he received the injury. He was 
sitting in hie chair when I reached his cham- 
ber. His countenance appeared natural, and 
his conversation was cheerful. He had no 
fever, or very little, if any. He insisted that 
he would resume his seat in a few days, and 
manifested more anxiety to return to the Sen- 
ate, and attend to his duties there, than for 
anything else. I left bim with the impression 
that he would return to the Senate in two or 
three days, notwithstanding I had been assured 



that there would be more or less inflammation 
of the wounded parts before the healing process 
would commence. 

I again visited him last Saturday; but that 
countenance, heretofore cheerful, and beaming 
with intelligence, had become pale and hag- 
gard. He appeared unable to sit up any con- 
siderable time. He told me that he felt so well, 
the night after I left him on my former visit, 
that he retained no servant or friend to remain 
in the room with him. That, during the night, 
he was seized with severe pain through the 
head, attended with high fever. The pain be- 
came so acute, that it appeared to him he 
could live but a short time without relief. That 
the Doctor, being called, opened the wounds, 
gave him an opiate, and in the course of the 
next day he obtained some sleep, and the pain 
partially subsided. That, soon as he could get 
from the city, he went to the country. That he 
found himself unable to take much exercise of 
either body or mind. Lying upon his bed, he 
described to me the singular sensations which 
occasionally gave him reason to apprehend that 
the brain was affected, and looking me full in 
the face, with great solemnity of countenance 
and deep emotions, he said, " I sometimes am 
led to apprehend that I may yet be doomed to 
that heaviest of all afflictions, to spend my time 
on earth in a living sepulchre." The expres- 
sion, the manner, and the tone of voice with 
which this was uttered, filled my heart with 
sadness. I pity the man whose feelings prompt 
him to impute to that gentleman a disposition 
to represent his injury greater than it really is. 

It has also been said, and repeated, daring 
this debate, that the Republican party are en 
deavoring- to manufacture political capital out 
of this affair. To effect that object, it will be 
necessary for them to do right. We have 
reached that period in our history when no par- 
ty or political association of men can commend 
themselves to the poople, except by their in- 
telligence and virtue. To gain popular favor, 
we must do right — we must imitate that Divine 
Being, one of whose attributes is justice. That 
duty I hope every Republican and every Dem- 
ocrat may perform, not merely on this, but on 
all occasions. The Republicans can make no 
capital out of this matter, unless Democrats do 
wrong? I would therefore advise each indi- 
vidual to act his own judgment, without refer- 
ence to any party. Let him act in such man- 
ner as to insure the approbation of his own 
con&cience. True, we constitute a high tribu- 
nal for the trial of a fellow member ; but above 
us is one more just, more dignified, more pow- 
erful — the tribunal of the people — who will not 
only judge the case before us, and correct any 
errors we may commit, but they will also judge 
each of us, and determine whether we do our 
duty in regard to it, and will award both to 
the accused and to ourselves the just merit or 
the appropriate penalty which he and we de- 
serve. But if Republicans do right, and the 
Democrats wrong, the people will reward one, 
and condemn the other. 



And now, having disposed of these matters, 
I approach the principal point relied on by the 
friends of the accused. Thpy insist that the 
speech of the Senator from Massachusetts con- 
tains such gross attacks on South Carolina, and 
on one of her Senators, as to justify the deadly 
assault made on him. 

I stated, at the commencement of my re- 
marks, that the speech was in strict compliance 
with the parliamentary law ; that, during its 
delivery, neither the President of the Senate, 
nor the member of that body from South Caro- 
lina then present, nor any other Senator, had 
called him to order for anything said in his 
speech, although they were authorized to do so. 
Again, no member who has yet spoken has at- 
tempted to point out a word, a sentence, or 
paragraph, in that speech, which, in the opin- 
ion of any man, transcends the strictest rules 
of debate. There is no such word, sentence, 
or paragraph, in the speech. 

Now, sir, if there be any one principle which - 
I regard as clear and indisputable, it 13, that 
the " freedom of debate," which the Constitu- 
tion says "shall not be abridged," has no lim- 
itation inside the rules of debate established 
by the Senate and by parliamentary law ; and 
to say that a speaker, while he keeps within 
parliamentary rules, is also subject to the cen- 
sorship of indivituals who may feel aggrieved 
at his remarks, would be so obviously absurd 
that no argument could render its erroneous 
character more apparent. Were such a doc- 
trine to prevail, we should be constrained, not 
merely to surrender the right of free speech, 
but with that surrender we must resign all 
hopes of a free Government. 

But I will not stop at this point. I say, 
with publicists and statesmen and jurists, that 
no words, whatever nay be their character, 
can justify an assault, even under municipal 
law. On this point, so plain to the compre- 
hension of every mind, I will not quote author- 
ities, Hor will I read decisions of courts or of 
legislative bodies. If such quotations were 
necessary, that duty has been fully and well 
performed by other gentlemen. 

This docrine of the right to avenge one's 
own wrongs strikes at the existence of all gov- 
ernment. If a man slander another, the law 
is open, aud he should be made to respond in 
damages. But if the offended party be allowed 
to judge in his own case, and avenge his own 
grievance, society must at once resolve itself 
into its original elements, and might becomes 
the only arbiter between individuals. The 
weak will be subdued, and the selfishness of 
mankind will become their only rule of action. 
It has therefore been found necessary to estab- 
lish such laws as will secure the weak and 
helpless in the enjoyment of their rights, and 
restrain the strong and powerful from encroach- 
ing upon the rights of others. 

These principles, however, have very little 
to do with the case before us. They may have 
been agitated with propriety upon the trial of 
the accused before the municipal court. He 



was then on trial for his offence against the 
peace of the community, against the personal 
security of individuals, against municipal law. 
That case has been fully tried and determined. 
With it we have nothing to do. But here, in 
this high judicatory of the People, the sovereign 
State of Massachusetts charges a member of 
our body with a violation of our Federal Con- 
stitution. She declares that the accused has 
deprived her of the services of one of her Sen- 
ators in the high councils of the nation — a 
crime of which the municipal court could not 
take jurisdiction — that he has, in fact, abridg- 
ed the freedom of speech, by depriving her 
Senator of the power of speaking. That for 
debate in the Senate her representative has 
been questioned, and by physical violence held 
responsible in another place. The People of 
these thirty-one sovereign States are also com- 
plainants. They allege that they have been 
deprived of the benefits which would have re- 
sulted from the public labors of the disabled 
Senator. They charge the accused with hav- 
ing profaned the Temple of Liberty, with vio- 
lating the sanctity of her inner court, and with 
a barbarous hand striking down a minister, as 
he was serving at the ahar of Freedom. The 
good and the great of all lands present, their 
complaints, declaring that the cause of justice 
has been deeply wounded by the accused hav- 
ing stricken down one of its most able advo- 
cates, thereby retarding the great work of civ- 
ilization and Christianity. 

To this arraignment to these charges I have 
heard no response, in mitigation or excuse, 
either from the accused, or from any friend 
who has attempted to advocate his cause. On 
these charges they stand mute. They have ad- 
vanced no plea, no answer, no argument, re- 
sponsive to them. On the contrary, the facts 
stand confessed; the crime is one of great 
moral and political turpitude. And it now re 
mains only to consider the penalty which ought 
to be awarded. We seek to inflict no corpo- 
real punishment, nor to take from the accused 
his pecuniary means, nor to wound his feelings, 
nor to tarnish his honor. We are actuated by 
no such desire. Our present wish, our only 
purpose, is to vindicate the Constitution, the 
rights of the States, and of the People; to lus- 
trateour Government and our institutions from 
the stigma brought upon them by this great, 
this lamentable outrage. 

This can only be done by excluding the per- 
petrator from our body. The moral sensibili- 
ties of the nation have been shocked, and it is 
our duty to expel the member. That is recom- 
mended by the committee. They have report- 
ed a resolution expelling him from this House. 
I shall feel constrained to vote for it. I would 
have preferred a resolution not merely expel- 
ling him, but adding to that expulsion a clause 
declaring him incapacitated to hold a seat in 
the present Congress. I think that would more 
perfectly comport with the feelings and the ex- 
pectations of the People. I shall, however, 
offer no amendment, but content myself with 



voting to confirm the action of the committee. 

Mr. Speaker, I feel humiliated, as a member 
of this American Congress, when I read the 
comments which have appeared in the Euro- 
pean press upon this subject, and learn the pain 
and mortification to which it has subjected the 
advocates of Liberty and free government in 
England and on the continent. Let those 
friends and presses in foreign lands know that 
the advocates of human progress in these Uni- 
ted States feel deeply the reproach which this 
transaction has brought upon the Government 
instituted by Washington and his compatriots ; 
yet it does not discourage them, nor does it im- 
pair their confidence in this greatest of all po- 
litical experiments, to test the capability of man 
to govern himself. Grave as the outrage must 
be regarded, it is but an incident in our politi- 
cal history, which, if properly regarded and 
condemned by the people, will not be likely to 
occur again. 

It has resulted from the manners, customs, 
and habits, of our slaveholding population. 
Human bondage had its origin in violence, and 
is sustained by force. Persons bred up in 
slaveholding communities become accustomed 
to see the rights of personal security violated ; 
God's image is daily assailed, disfigured, and 
mutilated, before their eyes. The slave is 
scourged, beaten, and sometimes murdered, in 
their presence. These things beget a disregard 
for this body, this habitation of the human soul. 
Hence the frequent scenes of violence, the fisti- 
cuffs, street fights, shootings, assassinations, and 
murders, among our slavehoUing population. 

If a man speaks disrespectfully of another, 
the injured party seeks his revenge in vio- 
lence. If a man insult another, the injured 
party feels at liberty to shoot him. With them, 
the remedy for personal injury appears to be 
the infliction of bodily pain, or suffering, or 
death, uponHhe offending party. 

Mr. Jefferson, speaking on this subject, de- 
clared, "there must doubtless be an unhappy 
influence on the manners of our people pro- 
duced by the existence of Slavery among us. 
The whole commerce (sa\s he) between master 
and slave is an exercise of the most boisterous 
passions, the most unremitting despotism." 

Not so with the free population of our North- 
ern States. There a higher degree of civiliza- 
tion exists. If a man treats another disre- 
spectfully, the matter is referred, by common 
conseut, to the judgment of their peers, the 
people around them. They censure or con- 
demn, as justice requires. The penalty affects 
the moral, the social, and political position of the 
offender. From these penalties he cannotescape. 

If a man utters language offensive to an- 
other, either in a bar-room or drawing-room, 
in the pulpit or at the Var, or in the legislative 
halls, he is held to answer for such violation of 
propriety before the tribunal of popular opin- 
ion. That opinion is always intelligent, impar- 
tial, and just. We place an unlimited confi- 
dence in its wisdom, and its judgments are 
always satisfactory. Nor does this system in- 



8 



terfere with judicial proceedings. It is above 
the decisions of municipal courts. They are 
bound down by statute laws, and trammelled 
by rules of evidence ; but no matter what their 
judgments may be, the popular mind will award 
the appropriate penalty to all offenders against 
social, moral, and political propriety. Hence, 
affrays, street fights, shootings, and violence, 
are unknown among our people. I have resi- 
ded more than half a century in my Congres- 
sional district ; I have during that time liter- 
ally mingled with the people ; but I never saw 
a man strike another, in either of the counties 
which I represent. Such is the case in all com- 
munities of sufficient intelligence and refine- 
ment to practice self government. 

This contrast which I have drawn between 
the manners and customs of the free and slave 
States was never more marked than it has 
been in this debate. Every Southern member 
who has expressed an opinion on the question 
has declared the severity of the language used 
by the Senator from Massachusetts good cause 
for the assault made upon him; while every 
member from the free States who has spoken 
has expressed his decided opinion that it could 
afford no cause, excuse, or justification, foi 
such an act. As I have stated, Mr. Butler 
spoke on the subject of Kansas thirty-six times 
during the present session ; the people judged 
of the merits of his several speeches. The 
speech of the Senator from Massachusetts was 
published, and the people will do justice to thai 
also ; and no act of the accused can affect the 
opinion of the country in regard to its merits. 
He, however, took upon himself the responsi 
bdity of avenging what he regarded a griev- 
ance, and popular opinion will also pass judg- 
ment on his act, and those who come after us 
will do justice to all concerned. 

While my venerable associate from Massa- 
chusetts [Mr. Adams] was on trial for perform- 
ing a plain constitutional duty, he was assailed 
with the bitterest invective by slaveholders 
The member now on trial from South Carolina 
has heard from the Representatives of our free 
States no word of personal unkindness. Never 
was the contrast between our free institutions 
of the North and the Slavery of the South more 
distinctly marked, nor their effect on society 
more visible. Violence, brute force, appeal to 
weapons, and bloodshed, mark the pathway ol 
one, while reflection, reason, justice, and the 
Gospel of Peace, control the other. 

Mr. Speaker, this case has arisen from efforts 
to abridge the freedom of debate- The blows 
which fell upon the head of the Senator from 
Massachusetts were aimed at the freedom oi 
speech. That Senator had, in his place, dis- 
charged the duty which he owed to himself, to 
his State, and to mankind. I feel that every 
word was true and just ; and such are the feel- 
ings of nine tenths of the population of the free 
North. But, for this discharge of duty, he was 
barbarously stricken down in his place. I had 
supposed the freedom of speech in Congress to 
have been regained. O ur '' gag rules," as they 

BUfcLL, & BLANCHARD 



were called, have been repudiated and stricken 
from our Manual, and for years we have spo- 
ken as freely in this body as we have in our 
popular assemblies. But now the contest has 
been suddenly renewed, and its renewal has 
been literally marked with blood; and how long 
it will continue, is unknown. 

Sir, this renewed attempt to restrain free 
spech has awaked in my breast sad and pain- 
ful recollections. It was my fortune to be one 
of the earliest victims of that illiberal and pro- 
scriptive spirit. For years I sat in this body 
with my lips sealed. We were not planned 
to speak of Slavery in any other than the most 
respectful term3. No member was allowed to 
utter the doctrines of Jefferson or Franklin, of 
Hancock or Adams. To regain the freedom 
of speech, I labored long and assiduously. I 
passed through many scenes of excitement and 
interest. I have been assaulted with the fist. 
I have seen the bludgeon flourished over me 
while speaking. In this Hall, 1 have seen the 
bowie-knife menacingly drawn upon me, within 
striking distance of my person ; and have heard 
the click of the pistol, as it was cocked, appa- 
rently for my assassination. I do not think, 
however, that I was in danger ; for persons who 
ihus play the bully are generally suspected not 
to be very dangerous. Those scenes now con- 
stitute reminiscences, in no respect honorable 
to the habits and manners of those who justify 
chem. They occurred, too, at times when the 
advocates of Freedom were socially ostracised 
in this city, and regarded with disfavor by all 
officers of Government. 

Agaiost this social and official tyranny I con- 
tended feebly, but steadily. The influence of 
popular opinion was at length brought to bear 
upon Congress, and our cause appeared to pro- 
gress in a manner most encouraging to the 
advocates of Liberty. This progress of Free- 
dom appears to have aroused a spirit of corre- 
sponding hostility, and we now find ourselves 
involved in this question of transcendent im- 
portance. It is a marked incident in that great 
contest which has long been waged between 
the Slave Power and the spirit of Freedom. In 
that conflict, I have mingled until my head has 
become white with the frosts of age, and my 
body begins to bend with the weight of years — 
until the silver cord is becoming loosed, and 
the wheel moves slowly at the cistern, and the 
golden bowl is being broken at the fountain. 

Fellow-members! to you, to the younger and 
abler statesmen of our land, I must consign 
this cause in which I have so long labored in 
a humble sphere, but with a willing, earnest, 
and devout spirit. I must soon retire; but, 
while I may linger upon the verge of life, my 
thoughts will often revert to this Hall, and 
cluster around those friends with whom 1 have 
served ; and, be assured, I will theu perform 
the last service which an old man can render 
to his country: I will pray that Justice may 
guide its legislation, that Liberty, and Progress, 
and Prosperity, may mark its pathway in all 
coming time. 



>, Printer*, Washington, D. C. 




006 718 264 9 



